I have things to say about it, but I'm not going to discuss it. I'm not comfortable. I'm just not comfortable.
I think I agree with what you're driving at, Brian. I like the idea. It's not something that I came, quite frankly....
Before I say, “Okay, let's just call a vote”, I'd like to think about it and reflect on it. You've made a good suggestion. There are things I'd like to share with you, but I'd also like to reflect on it first. You've made a suggestion to change this.
The way it stands right now, I was against this motion for exactly the reasons that Lloyd pointed out. I don't think it's our business, as overseers, to go into the nitty-gritty. If they follow the rules and we don't like the outcome, it's our job to look at the rules, but it's not our job to say, “Did you follow the rules?” We have to take, as overseers, that they're following the rules. If you're concerned that they haven't followed the rules, that's a different kind of conversation.
If you're concerned that the rules aren't right or the rules haven't been looked at, that's something I'm more open to doing. That's actually our role. We're not here to micromanage the process.
I came in here against this motion as it stands. What you're suggesting, Brian, is radical. It's not just a tweak; it's a different perspective, which I'm more open to.